MacDougal
MacDougal v. Catalyst Nightclub
Opinion
Opinion
Jenkins, J.
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES, LITIGATION EXPENSES AND COSTS
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs have filed a motion for attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses and costs as allowed under the July 9, 1998, Consent Decree and Settlement Agreement entered into by both parties. Rein Declaration, Exh. L. The Court has reviewed the papers submitted by both parties and issues the following memorandum and order.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This motion is a result of the second of two lawsuits filed against defendants, who operate the Catalyst Nightclub. . The first lawsuit (“Catalyst I ”) was filed on December 23, 1994 by plaintiffs Armando Plasti-na, Robert Freiler and John Daugherty, three disabled patrons of the Catalyst. The Catalyst I plaintiffs sought injunctive relief for defendants’ failure to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”) and California laws which require public facilities to provide access for the disabled. The Catalyst I plaintiffs also requested damages as allowed under California law and recovery of legal fees and expenses. Catalyst I was dismissed pursuant to a Release and Settlement Agreement dated March 10, 1996. Under the Agreement,…